THE COMPARISON OF THE AFFECTIVE STRATEGIES USED BY DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN PREPARATORY CLASSES IN TURKEY TO COPE WITH AFFECTIVE FILTER IN SPEAKING ENGLISH VS. THEIR SPEAKING PROFICIENCY

Authors

  • Merve Temel Department of English Language Teaching, Institute of Social Sciences, Cukurova University Adana, Turkey
  • Yonca Ozkan Department of English Language Teaching, Institute of Social Sciences, Cukurova University Adana, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2016.21.33-61

Keywords:

Speaking A Foreign Language, Affective Filter, Affective Strategies

Abstract

Accompanied by the newly emerging circumstances and rapidly increasing requirements of the globalizing world, language learning and teaching has always been in the limelight. It is a field in which there are a great number of researches to help learners and teachers overcome hardships and foster their experiences in language. Compared to other skills, speaking in a different language is the most challenging one for learners, which deserves much attention. Along with cognitive, personal, social factors, etc., affective ones like motivation, confidence and anxiety also play a significant role in performing speaking. Individuals learn a language if they have an intelligible input and if their affective filters (AF) are low enough to permit it in. In studies done on this area, learners state that their speaking performances are hindered because a mental block prevents them realizing a good speaking when they feel unmotivated, anxious or insecure. It is therefore important to come up with strategies so as to come to grips with it for both learners and teachers in helping them. This pilot study aims at finding affective variables domestic (Turkish) and international students in preparatory classes of two state universities in Turkey might face in speaking English and exploring different strategies used to lower affective filter and itscorrelation with their achievement through speaking grades. This way, it intends to help learners from both sides see what other strategies are employed by those from a different background, society, culture and nationality for the promotion of speaking, and give insight into their implementations. As a result of the study, which was carried upon 11 domestic, Turkish and 11 international students, it shows that international students have higher values in affective factors like self-confidence, motivation in, and attitude towards speaking English than Turkish students. Likewise, their speaking scores and affective strategy use are ahead of those of Turkish students.

References

Aydın, G. (2012). The role of English proficiency level, personal and affective factors predicting language preparatory school students’ academic success

Deneme, S. (2010). Cross-Cultural Differences in Language Learning Strategy Preferences: A Comparative Study. Language Society and Culture, 1327-774X.

Henter, R. (2013). Affective factors involved in learning a foreign language. Science Direct, 127 (2014) 373 – 378.

Kato, S. (2005). How language learning strategies affect English proficiency in Japanese university students. Vol.7, No.1, pp.239~262.

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Pergamum Press Inc.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamum Press Inc.

Krashen, S. (2013). Second language acquisition: theory, applications, and some conjectures. Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S. (2014). The comprehension hypothesis and animal language. Studies in honour of Marianne Nikolov. Lingua Franca Csoport.

Krashen, S. (2015). The end of motivation. New Routes, 55: 34-35

Downloads

Published

2016-03-15

How to Cite

Temel, M., & Ozkan, Y. (2016). THE COMPARISON OF THE AFFECTIVE STRATEGIES USED BY DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN PREPARATORY CLASSES IN TURKEY TO COPE WITH AFFECTIVE FILTER IN SPEAKING ENGLISH VS. THEIR SPEAKING PROFICIENCY. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2016.21.33-61